HomeMy WebLinkAbout8(a)(i) Variance & ReductionsItem 8(a)(i) Variance/Reduction process for Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCA) and Wetland buffers Page 1/4
18.22.250 Variance Types and Criteria
A. Types of Variance
Requests for a variance or buffer averaging shall be made on forms provided by the Administrator and shall contain the information found in JCC 18.40.100. All applications shall also include a mitigation plan consistent with the provisions of Article IX Special Reports of this
chapter. The application shall be processed pursuant to Chapter 18.40 Application and Review Procedures JCC
Applications for a variance to the performance standards specified by this chapter may be pursued by the following three types of variance procedures that are listed in the following order of preference; provided, that any approval is consistent with this subsection and chapter:
(1) Buffer Averaging. Averaging of buffer widths required for major and minor new developments as specified by this chapter may be allowed for wetlands and aquatic
habitat conservation areas. Applications for buffer averaging shall be processed by the Administrator in accordance with JCC 18.40 Permit Application and Review Procedures JCC; provided, that the buffer width is not reduced more than twenty-five (25) percent at any point.; The intent of buffer averaging is no net loss of the total buffer area.
Buffer averaging requests shall demonstrate consistency with the following provisions of this section to the satisfaction of the Administrator:
(a) Determine whether the reduced buffer:
(i) Acts as a biofilter that protects water quality of the wetland, aquatic habitat conservation area, and/or any interconnected surface and ground water resources.
(ii) Moderates wetland and aquatic habitat conservation area water level
fluctuations.
(iii) Contributes woody debris and other nutrient inputs to wetlands, aquatic habitat conservation area, and/or interconnected surface water features.
(iv) Limits visual, auditory, and direct intrusion between critical areas and developed environments.
(v) Provides important wildlife habitat components for species dependent or associated with wetland, marine, and riverine environments.
(vi) Allows for the natural movement of a stream within its floodplain or channel migration zone.
(vii) Separates development from potential flooding impacts.
Item 8(a)(i) Variance/Reduction process for Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCA) and Wetland buffers Page 2/4
(b) Alterations are, to the extent practicable, placed on existing road grades, utility corridors, or other developed lands.
(c) The modified buffer maintains, increases, and/or enhances the protection of native plant communities.
(d) The modified buffer maintains, increases, and/or enhances the protection of significant habitat features classified pursuant to the Wetlands and Fish & Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas Sections of this chapter.
(e) The modified buffer retains, increases, and/or enhances the protection of significant wildlife movement corridors classified pursuant to Wetland section of
this chapter.
(f) Low intensity land uses are located adjacent to the buffer within the
jurisdiction. Low intensity land uses are associated with low levels of human disturbance or low habitat impacts, including, but not limited to, passive recreation, open space, or agriculture or forest management land uses. For residential uses, low intensity land use means densities equal to or less than one unit per five (5) acres.
(g) Reduction of the modified buffer does not increase the amount of impervious surfaces.
(h) The modified buffer maintains, increases, and/or enhances the protection of erosion and landslide hazard areas adjacent to the critical area.
(i) The development is designed to separate and screen impacts such as noise, glare, vegetation trampling, etc. of adjacent land uses from the critical area. The site design shall consider the varying degrees of impacts of different land uses. For example, parking lots, store entrances, and roads generally have higher noise and glare impacts than the rear of the store. Site screening should take advantage of natural topography or existing vegetation, wherever possible. Where natural screening is not available, berms, landscaping, and structural screens should be implemented (e.g., orient buildings to screen parking lots and store entrances from critical area). Landscaping shall be consistent with Chapter 18.30.130 JCC.
(j) The buffer dimension is not reduced more than twenty-five (25) percent at any point.
(2) Administrative Variance. If buffer averaging is not feasible, A Type II administrative variance to the buffer widths may be allowed for wetland and aquatic habitat conservation areas as set forth by this chapter; provided, that a buffer reduction of not more than (12.5) percent is requested; provided further, that applications shall be processed in accordance with Section 18.40 Permit Application and Review Procedures. Criteria for approval of an administrative variance are specified in JCC 18.22.250(3)(C) below.
Item 8(a)(i) Variance/Reduction process for Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCA) and Wetland buffers Page 3/4 (3) Variance. If buffer averaging or an administrative variance is not practicable, a reduction of the buffer up to 50 percent may be authorized through a CASP. If the CASP requirements cannot be met, or if the reduction exceeds a 50% of the buffers specified by this chapter, a Type III Variance in accordance with JCC 18.40 shall be
required before the Hearing Examiner. The criteria for the review of a variance are specified in JCC 18.22.250(C)
B. Variance Criteria
Before any variance is granted, it shall be shown by the applicant that the following criteria have
been met:
(1) Failure to grant the variance would result in an extraordinary hardship to the applicant.
(2) The extraordinary hardship to the applicant is specifically related to the property, and is the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and the application of this chapter, and is not, for example, from deed restrictions or the applicant’s own actions.
(3) The variance is justified to cure a special circumstance and not simply for the economic convenience of the applicant and no other practicable or reasonable alternative exists (see Definitions).
(4) The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the critical area, public health, safety, welfare, use or interest; or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity.
(5) The granting of the variance is the minimum necessary to afford relief to accommodate a use allowed under the Comprehensive Plan, JCC Title , Land Use Districts, JCC Title 18.15, Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program (SMP), JCC Title 18.25, or other applicable provisions of the Jefferson County Code.
(6) The granting of the variance will not materially compromise the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, JCC, or be inconsistent with County land use codes or inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this chapter.
(7) A habitat management plan is required for an administrative variance. A mitigation plan is required for a Type III variance. These plans shall be submitted and is approved by the review authority for the proposed variance request.
NEW DEFINITIONS “Practicable alternative” means an alternative that is available and capable of being carried out
after taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project purposes, and having less impact to critical areas. It may include an area not owned by the applicant which could reasonably have been or be obtained, utilized, expanded, or managed in order to fulfill the basic purpose of the proposed activity.
Item 8(a)(i) Variance/Reduction process for Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCA) and Wetland buffers Page 4/4 “Reasonable alternative” means an activity that could feasibly attain or approximate a proposal’s objectives, but at a lower environmental cost or decreased level of environmental degradation. Reasonable alternatives may be those over which the regulatory authority has authority to control impacts.